Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon Page: <<   < prev  107 108 [109] 110 111   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 10/31/2013 9:49:55 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9570
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cannonfodder


quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

The problem with this is the P-47's rate of climb sucks. I'm constantly getting dived on because the CAP can climb faster and get the bounce on occasion. The P-47 isn't the beast I've been led to believe it is when it's not flying at 42k and getting the dive bonus against lower altitude Japanese fighters.



Without going into game mechanics, the P47 was a slow climber. If you go in low (lower then the opposition) as a slow climber you are in trouble. It is the fighter pilots job to try and fight at an advantage..

If you take away the P47s altitude and thus a large part of its speed advantage what does it have left? Ruggedness and guns - thats about it...




Hmmmm...I am pretty much finding it to be a beast and like it very much. In game terms, I think speed is the most important factor. The 47N is a brute mutha. However, my top aces are all flying the corsair so what do I know.

I real air combat climb is relative. It depends on what kind of climb it is. The light Japanese planes could usually climb fast in a sustained climb but there are many other ways to climb. Because of their horsepower and weight, most Allied planes were better in a zoom climb which is common in energy fighting, and because of their superior speed most Allied planes could best a zero in a shallow extended climb. If a P38 lightning kept his speed up and used a shallow climb there was just not anyway a zero could keep up with it. In the end the faster plane usually gets to pick the engagement which means if the altitude advantage is not there, the faster plane can just opt to extend away them climb back to a good height and either go home or re-engage on more favorable terms.

Have you looked at the climb stats on the Bearcat? That thing is a pure rocket sled to the stars...

< Message edited by crsutton -- 10/31/2013 9:50:24 PM >


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to KenchiSulla)
Post #: 3241
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/1/2013 12:58:29 PM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8534
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Pax, you can have some of my supply if you want to? I have 103 million sitting around not doing much of anything.

103M!!?!!



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3242
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/1/2013 2:25:08 PM   
obvert


Posts: 12118
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Pax, you can have some of my supply if you want to? I have 103 million sitting around not doing much of anything.

103M!!?!!




Pretty amazing the difference. Not sure how much I've used all game, but pretty sure it's no where near a tenth of that figure.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3243
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/1/2013 7:05:57 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Feb 22, 1944

What is left of the KB has succesfully re-grouped at Makassar, while the allied fleet retreats to Darwin to lick its wounds.
The Katzuragi crew has managed to estinguish the fires, but the sys damage is up to 74...will be hard to see her in combat again, even if we manage to reach a yard
However, the airgroups have been all refilled and the torps reloaded (thanks God i had a good reserves of supplies, AKEs and naval support at Makassar waiting for me).
I've divided the KB into 2 CVTFs and 1 SCTF. The damaged ships (3 CVs and 3 CVLs, along with 1 BB, 2 CAs, 2 CLs and 10 DDs) are grouped into another TF and are sent back to HI moving through Singapore (i intend to move the damaged CVL to the Singapore yard, while escorting the CLs to HK and the BB/CVs to HI).
The KB will remain in the area. I can still manage to efford a force of 670 striking a/c... i'll have to be carefull tough...cann0t efford anymore losses like that. So i'll play in defence.

In the meanwhile another convoy full of troops is unloading at Menado, while more troops are being saved from Timor area and Ambon/Boela (just managed to rescue a full mixed regiment from Alor!...right under Brad's eyes!!!).

Sarmi and Ramree keep on holding off the americans and the brits...

Enemy subs all around hunting for my damaged CVs...


For what concerns the P-47s... well, the 2nd best mnvr rule may not be the best, but for sure it's the best HR around at the moment. I'm really looking forward for Symon's air modifications, even if i haven't talked yet with Brad about trying them... will surely speak with him about it

(in reply to obvert)
Post #: 3244
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/2/2013 4:55:56 PM   
Symon


Posts: 1928
Joined: 11/24/2012
From: De Eye-lands, Mon
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
I'm really looking forward for Symon's air modifications, even if i haven't talked yet with Brad about trying them... will surely speak with him about it

Do NOT wanna hijack, so posted some stuff about this on the Airplane thread in the Mod Forum. Since it's my algorithm, and not Matrix's, I can talk about it. Just can't talk about the code or how some of the numbers are generated. Will talk to you and Brian, all you want.

Ciao. JWE

_____________________________

Nous n'avons pas peur! Vive la liberté! Moi aussi je suis Charlie!
Yippy Ki Yay.

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3245
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 10:21:59 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Game is proceeding very slowly. One turn every couple of days...

We reached feb 24, 1944

The Katsuragi finally sunk... she had just 9 fld damage and 70 sys so I decided to move her from Makassar. was a too easy target for his 4E and his subs could have started to move en masse around Makassar, bloking any retreat path also to the rest of the damaged CVs... could get trapped there.
So I moved her out. In a single night the pumps failed and she went down...
So the last battle costed me 2 CVs, 2 CVEs and 2 CVLs...

However the rest of the damaged CVs are safely moving away...while what is left of the KB positioned NW of Menado.

The allies didn't do much lately... except from conquering via-paradrop the last empy dot base between Ambon and Kendari...thus closing the sealanes from Kendari to Menado...

The economy:.... oh well...

Supply is down to 3.37 millions all over the empire
Fuel down to 4.4 mil
Oil down to 300k
HI 2.5 mil
Arm 177k
Veh 46k


While i'm managing to control somehow the fuel dropping curve, supply falling is really uncontrolled...

Planes... Navy pools are almost empty, while I had to stop most of IJAAF production... too many Tojos, Franks, Helens etc...

(in reply to Symon)
Post #: 3246
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 10:37:54 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Here's a map where you can see the latest allied conquered bases (yellow circles) and the isolated Japanese garrisons (red circles inside grey lines).
The red quadrangles are the Japanese strongpoints.

As you can see the dam is breached and the allies are now roaming and advancing both north and west. Kendari is no more a safe base for my fleet (already evacuating the support ships and support units, leaving just fighting units there), while the allies are now approaching the next defensive line that covers Mindanao.

The only consolation is that Sarmi keeps on holding and so the Biak sector is more or less safe... keeping the Mariannas' door closed




Attachment (1)

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3247
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 11:06:34 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8534
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline
GJ,

You've done as good of a job here as anyone I have seen. Better than I could. What you seem to confirm to me is that the DEI is not defensible, not in a classic sense. It is an ambush arena. The best I think I want to hope/plan for is ambush the allies two or three times as they move through.

You've held the oil longer than most, but that is an outcome of your no night bombing HR. Many opponents won't agree to that, and mine sure doesn't (Andy AI won't agree to ANY HR's! ) So, most of us are not fighting to keep the oil flowing as we would have lost it +6 Months ago as soon as we lost Darwin and the B29's arrived. We are just fighting for space/time.

Keep going. Taking lot'sa notes here in case I ever get an opponent that will agree to no night bombing.

PS: not disagreeing with your HR at all, but the AFB sentiment in the forum is vociferously against it so ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3248
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 11:20:58 AM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
GJ,

Watch Manado. Its the only level 9 AF capable base in the entire region. There is also a backdoor to Manado in that small dotbase SW of the base.


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3249
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 11:48:59 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

GJ,

You've done as good of a job here as anyone I have seen. Better than I could. What you seem to confirm to me is that the DEI is not defensible, not in a classic sense. It is an ambush arena. The best I think I want to hope/plan for is ambush the allies two or three times as they move through.

You've held the oil longer than most, but that is an outcome of your no night bombing HR. Many opponents won't agree to that, and mine sure doesn't (Andy AI won't agree to ANY HR's! ) So, most of us are not fighting to keep the oil flowing as we would have lost it +6 Months ago as soon as we lost Darwin and the B29's arrived. We are just fighting for space/time.

Keep going. Taking lot'sa notes here in case I ever get an opponent that will agree to no night bombing.

PS: not disagreeing with your HR at all, but the AFB sentiment in the forum is vociferously against it so ...



Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

Anyway, we've managed to ambush the allied quite a lot in this theatre in the last year...it's been pretty bloody for Brad to advance here and i don't think this was the best advancing vector for him. Too many bases to close before he could advance safely...
The oil flow remains "secure"...or better: as secure as it could be with the horde of allied subs around. But before he can shut down my fields he needs to be in sweeping range...so some more weeks i guess.

Joc: Menado is well garrisoned... 5 forts and nearly 1000 AVs with some heavy guns there.
The bases around it have some serious garrisons too. He will be conquering them, but that won't be cheap nor easy

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3250
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 11:54:50 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8534
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

I agree, but as you know it is not unanimous at all .... you are fortunate to have found an opponent to agree ...

_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3251
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 11:59:10 AM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

I agree, but as you know it is not unanimous at all .... you are fortunate to have found an opponent to agree ...



Yes, cannot agree more. Brad has been the perfect opponent, in every possible meaning!


However as soon as Brad will be in B29 range of Japan, he will be able to night bomb. So we'll see the same outcomes we're seeing in Joc-Obvert's game

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3252
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 2:20:11 PM   
fcharton

 

Posts: 1113
Joined: 10/4/2010
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
However as soon as Brad will be in B29 range of Japan, he will be able to night bomb. So we'll see the same outcomes we're seeing in Joc-Obvert's game


Yes but then, the game is in autopilot mode. He collects the VP, you try to limit it, and both of you get the final result in short order.

Francois

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3253
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 2:42:23 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

I agree, but as you know it is not unanimous at all .... you are fortunate to have found an opponent to agree ...


The problem is that Jap fighters are so insanely powerful against 4Es doing anything outside sweep range in daylight is completely out of the question. I think a more reasonable balance here would negate the need for night bombings that many have to resort to.

I think the cries of "overpowered 4Es" took it a bit too far and now we have the reverse problem. So now the allied players have to find circumventing ways to use their "paper 4Es" as I fondly (not really ) like to think of them. That leads to heavy night bombings instead which is not working very well.

I think massed night bombings of ports and AFs is too accurate and powerful. Its no problem to mass 500-1000 bombers and close airfield after airfield within range. We have not used it in our game after realising it was a problem. Strategic night bombings have to be allowed though as the B29s are just as "paper" as the rest of the 4Es. Heck even at night I´m losing 0.5 B29s per airborne NF.

(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3254
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 4:32:31 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

I agree, but as you know it is not unanimous at all .... you are fortunate to have found an opponent to agree ...


The problem is that Jap fighters are so insanely powerful against 4Es doing anything outside sweep range in daylight is completely out of the question. I think a more reasonable balance here would negate the need for night bombings that many have to resort to.

I think the cries of "overpowered 4Es" took it a bit too far and now we have the reverse problem. So now the allied players have to find circumventing ways to use their "paper 4Es" as I fondly (not really ) like to think of them. That leads to heavy night bombings instead which is not working very well.

I think massed night bombings of ports and AFs is too accurate and powerful. Its no problem to mass 500-1000 bombers and close airfield after airfield within range. We have not used it in our game after realising it was a problem. Strategic night bombings have to be allowed though as the B29s are just as "paper" as the rest of the 4Es. Heck even at night I´m losing 0.5 B29s per airborne NF.



Joc, as u know I play both Japs and allies and, i'm sorry, I don't agree with your opinion about 4Es, nor about jap fighters being overpowered.
If the allies fail to obtain the control of the skies over their targets, they cannot hope to send in 4Es without escort and see them coming back safely. It's a wrong assumption imho.
The 4Es shouldn't be used (as they used to be at the beginning of witp) or thought as a way to obtain the local air superiority over a base or an area. They need the fighters (and the navy) to clear the skies before they can be used to close down AFs and Ports.
The mid-war Japs fighters are just as good as they should be against allied 4Es.
For what it's worth, I've played thousands of hours in IL2 Sturmovicks and the following upgrades and I can easily say that a N1K could easily shoot down a couple of 4Es if flown properly (meaning if you know how to boom&zoom them using the good angles in order to avoid their guns).

However we're both beating a dead horse here. Guess there will never be, here in the forum, a common point of view about 4Es

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3255
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/6/2013 4:41:51 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
However we're both beating a dead horse here. Guess there will never be, here in the forum, a common point of view about 4Es


That we can both agree on at least!

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3256
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/8/2013 2:44:10 AM   
PaxMondo


Posts: 8534
Joined: 6/6/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy
However we're both beating a dead horse here. Guess there will never be, here in the forum, a common point of view about 4Es


That we can both agree on at least!

I think the entire forum can agree on this!



_____________________________

Pax

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3257
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/12/2013 4:44:02 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
Feb 24-28, 1944

The game proceeds slowly...very slowly, but proceeds.

We're trying to fight back as we can, but the odds are against us now.

Kendari and Biak are being raided by several Fletchers TFs... so far we've managed to repulse them with some small DDs losses, but we cannot hold them off for long. The KB lingers at Menado and launched a series of uncoordinated strikes against small shippings north of Ambon... losing more planes and pilots for a couple of xAPs full of engineers... not worth the cost!
Then we swept from Kendari, obtaining a good 2-1 and 24 Oscar Kamikazes sunk 2 more transports full of engineers...again little and meaningless victories in the big picture.

On the 26th we managed to ambush the daily bombing runs from Hollandia to Sarmi, downing 150 enemy planes and losing 30 of my own. Not bad. Had to disband 2 groups of Georges that were stuck at Sarmi after the battle, losing some 40 airframes...but we, again, slowed them down on that flank! And the allies are nowhere near to breakthrough at Sarmi.

The enemy CVs are unseen....mmm...

More landings at Namlea... no way to stop them.

My damaged CVs are getting close to the HI...thanks god.

2 BBs (Fusos), 2 CLs and 4 DDs are ready at Tokyo after some loooooong repairs.

The evacuation of Timor and Ambon keeps on going on. One more mixed bde has been evacuated by air and by fast transport.
Also saved an HQ and some AA units from Alor and Roti. Not bad.


(in reply to PaxMondo)
Post #: 3258
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/13/2013 4:09:03 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
The game is really slow now. More or less two turns per week. I see QBall very active on the Civil War II forum, so I fear he might feel a bit of dis-affection for WITP and for our game.
Let's hope for the best...

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3259
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/13/2013 5:15:56 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

The game is really slow now. More or less two turns per week. I see QBall very active on the Civil War II forum, so I fear he might feel a bit of dis-affection for WITP and for our game.
Let's hope for the best...


Lets hope he doesn´t repeat the same vanishing act he did with CR.


(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3260
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/13/2013 5:20:31 PM   
veji1

 

Posts: 1022
Joined: 7/9/2005
Status: offline
bah the situation is different, he is on the winning side. AE represents an intenste commitment for a long period of time, that interest might wane at some point is normal.

_____________________________

Adieu Ô Dieu odieux... signé Adam

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3261
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/13/2013 5:22:33 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: veji1

bah the situation is different, he is on the winning side. AE represents an intenste commitment for a long period of time, that interest might wane at some point is normal.


True that.

(in reply to veji1)
Post #: 3262
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/13/2013 5:48:48 PM   
khyberbill


Posts: 1941
Joined: 9/11/2007
From: new milford, ct
Status: offline
I recall that happening as I was following an AAR.

_____________________________

"Its a dog eat dog world Sammy and I am wearing Milkbone underwear" -Norm.

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3263
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/14/2013 3:16:52 PM   
leehunt27@bloomberg.net


Posts: 532
Joined: 9/6/2004
Status: offline

Trying to think of strategies to counter the Allies while falling asleep helps me keep the interest up-- and being in a different time zone where you look forward to the "morning" turn each day helps too.

And reading WWII history books and noticing, "hey wait, how did I let the Allies threaten Mandalay in early 1943 when they didn't get there till much later historically..."

_____________________________

John 21:25

(in reply to khyberbill)
Post #: 3264
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/17/2013 9:48:02 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
We did two more turns. Hopefully Brad just had some email problems

Feb 28-29, March 1, 1944

Well, some mixed turns for the Empire.

Between Feb 28 and 29 the allies moved a CV/CVE TF up to Sorong...completely unseen...
I had several transport TFs evacuating fragments from Biak area to Bab...
The allies did attack at night with their SDBs...sinking a couple of already damaged xAPs...
Then, when the day arrived, some 150 TBFs and SDBs attacked my SAGs near Biak... but found my brave CAP!
We downed nearly 100 enemy bombers!
More bombers kept on attacking my transports on the open ocean and sunk 10 more of them, along with several hundreds men inside them

The next day, the KB and the LBA tried to retaliate
Didn't go as planned.
Half of my KB planes (from Ternate) didn't launch.
Mixed results... the LBA did a decent job tough...sweeps from Sorong to Misol and more bombers following...


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 59 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N2 Jill x 27
N1K2-J George x 25
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 42

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 12
P-40K Warhawk x 13
F6F-3 Hellcat x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 5 destroyed, 5 damaged
Ki-43-IIb Oscar: 6 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
DD Thatcher
DD Abner Read
DD Carmick
DD Stevens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Misool , at 80,108

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 59 NM, estimated altitude 36,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 16 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-44-IIc Tojo x 28

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 10
P-40K Warhawk x 7
F6F-3 Hellcat x 11

Japanese aircraft losses
Ki-44-IIc Tojo: 2 destroyed

Allied aircraft losses
P-38H Lightning: 2 destroyed
P-40K Warhawk: 4 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 2 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on Misool , at 80,108

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 80 NM, estimated altitude 37,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
Ki-84r Frank x 51

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 3
P-40K Warhawk x 1
F6F-3 Hellcat x 4

No Japanese losses

Allied aircraft losses
P-38H Lightning: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108 *from KB near Ternate...(

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 78 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 23 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 91
B7A2 Grace x 8
D4Y4 Judy x 25

Allied aircraft
P-38H Lightning x 1
F6F-3 Hellcat x 2

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y4 Judy: 5 damaged

Allied aircraft losses
P-38H Lightning: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Racehorse
xAK Jacques Laramie, Torpedo hits 1
AM Dynamic, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAP Duntroon, Bomb hits 3, on fire
xAK Cape Constance, Bomb hits 1
DD Balch
SC-637
xAP Cleveland Abbe, Bomb hits 2, on fire
xAK Californian, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage

Allied ground losses:
87 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108

Weather in hex: Partial cloud

Raid detected at 69 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 20 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 7
D4Y4 Judy x 15

Japanese aircraft losses
D4Y4 Judy: 3 damaged

Allied Ships
DD Welles, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires
CL Caradoc, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Morning Air attack on TF, near Misool at 79,108

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid spotted at 36 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 9 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B7A2 Grace x 13

Allied aircraft
FM-1 Wildcat x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
B7A2 Grace: 5 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
AM Champion
xAK Tarifa, Torpedo hits 3, and is sunk

Allied ground losses:
497 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 27 destroyed, 14 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 7 (6 destroyed, 1 disabled)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 74 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 24 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B6N2 Jill x 18
N1K2-J George x 25
Ki-43-IIb Oscar x 20

Allied aircraft
P-40K Warhawk x 2
F6F-3 Hellcat x 2

Japanese aircraft losses
B6N2 Jill: 7 damaged
B6N2 Jill: 1 destroyed by flak

Allied aircraft losses
P-40K Warhawk: 1 destroyed
F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed

Allied Ships
DD Abner Read
DD Stevens
DD Nicholson

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 79 NM, estimated altitude 14,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 21 minutes

Japanese aircraft
A6M5 Zero x 97
B7A2 Grace x 28
D4Y4 Judy x 43

Japanese aircraft losses
B7A2 Grace: 3 damaged
D4Y4 Judy: 2 damaged

Allied Ships
DD Clark
SC-743
DD Welles, Bomb hits 6, and is sunk
xAP Cleveland Abbe, Bomb hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage
SC-983
AK Draco, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
CL Caradoc, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAP William Kent, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
DD Balch
SC-744, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
SC-637

Allied ground losses:
336 casualties reported
Squads: 0 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 4 destroyed, 27 disabled
Engineers: 2 destroyed, 0 disabled
Vehicles lost 3 (1 destroyed, 2 disabled)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Misool at 80,108

Weather in hex: Overcast

Raid detected at 66 NM, estimated altitude 15,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 19 minutes

Japanese aircraft
D4Y4 Judy x 12

No Japanese losses

Allied Ships
SC-984
xAP Duntroon, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
xAK Lorrain, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Afternoon Air attack on TF, near Misool at 79,108

Weather in hex: Light rain

Raid spotted at 39 NM, estimated altitude 13,000 feet.
Estimated time to target is 10 minutes

Japanese aircraft
B7A2 Grace x 16

Allied aircraft
FM-1 Wildcat x 3

Japanese aircraft losses
B7A2 Grace: 4 destroyed

No Allied losses

Allied Ships
xAP Jalavihar
xAP Surada, Torpedo hits 2, and is sunk
xAP Ethiopia, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk

Allied ground losses:
4130 casualties reported
Squads: 5 destroyed, 2 disabled
Non Combat: 226 destroyed, 57 disabled
Engineers: 15 destroyed, 16 disabled
Guns lost 28 (28 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 34 (34 destroyed, 0 disabled)





Not bad i would say.

The CVs retreated South tough....


Then the allies, after a HUGE air bombardment, attacked Ramree Island and Namlea, conquering the latter


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Namlea (76,108)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 17408 troops, 223 guns, 247 vehicles, Assault Value = 572

Defending force 2146 troops, 27 guns, 9 vehicles, Assault Value = 9

Allied adjusted assault: 230

Japanese adjusted defense: 17

Allied assault odds: 13 to 1 (fort level 2)

Allied forces CAPTURE Namlea !!!

Japanese aircraft
no flights

Japanese aircraft losses
A6M5 Zero: 5 destroyed
D4Y4 Judy: 2 destroyed
B6N2 Jill: 4 destroyed

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+), disruption(-), fatigue(-), experience(-)
supply(-)
Attacker: fatigue(-)

Japanese ground losses:
701 casualties reported
Squads: 52 destroyed, 0 disabled
Non Combat: 9 destroyed, 5 disabled
Engineers: 5 destroyed, 0 disabled
Guns lost 7 (7 destroyed, 0 disabled)
Vehicles lost 6 (6 destroyed, 0 disabled)

Assaulting units:
4th Marine Division
1st Army Tank Regiment
25th Infantry/C Division

Defending units:
Yokosuka 4th SNLF
Ankei SNLF /1
69th JAAF AF Bn


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ground combat at Ramree Island (54,48)

Allied Deliberate attack

Attacking force 32137 troops, 612 guns, 777 vehicles, Assault Value = 1367

Defending force 13611 troops, 145 guns, 9 vehicles, Assault Value = 375

Allied adjusted assault: 1705

Japanese adjusted defense: 547

Allied assault odds: 3 to 1 (fort level 4)

Allied Assault reduces fortifications to 3

Combat modifiers
Defender: terrain(+)
Attacker:

Japanese ground losses:
734 casualties reported
Squads: 9 destroyed, 140 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 2 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 1 disabled
Guns lost 12 (2 destroyed, 10 disabled)
Vehicles lost 2 (1 destroyed, 1 disabled)

Allied ground losses:
489 casualties reported
Squads: 1 destroyed, 56 disabled
Non Combat: 0 destroyed, 20 disabled
Engineers: 0 destroyed, 10 disabled

Assaulting units:
23rd Indian Division
150th RAC Regiment
268th Motorised Brigade
20th Indian Division
Provisionl Tank Brigade
25th Indian/A Division
XXXIII Indian Corps

Defending units:
41st Infantry Regiment
21st Ind.Mixed Brigade
55th/B Division
5th Mortar Battalion




Ramree Is. is about to fall... and Burma is at danger


The retreat continues from Koepang.
We managed to extract 400 AVs from Saumlaki and nearly 500 from Timor

Several of my transports are intercepted over Sarmi...

With the 1st of March 1944 several of my air groups are due to withdraw.... now i need to reorganize most of my air defences


(in reply to leehunt27@bloomberg.net)
Post #: 3265
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/17/2013 10:00:39 PM   
GreyJoy


Posts: 6750
Joined: 3/18/2011
Status: offline
However the next defensive line is taking shape. We're using all the Mavis-Emilies and transports we can to redeploy fast.
The unvaluable PBs (6000 endurance) are doing a great job too. Obviously supplies are somewhat short everywhere, but i think Brad will find a tough nut to crack as soon as he decides to advance a bit North.

Now we're also redeploying in Burma. Think it's time to think about a withrawal...but i don't see any decent defensive line once the plains are in allied dirty hands... mmmm.....

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3266
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/18/2013 2:46:33 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 9570
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


quote:

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo


quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy


Thx Pax. Well, NB is really overpowered imho. And Brad thinks along the same lines.
Also, we've avoided it till now, so a change in the HR won't be doable now (i have planned all my production and R&D on that HR and also my strategic distributions of AA units).

I agree, but as you know it is not unanimous at all .... you are fortunate to have found an opponent to agree ...



Yes, cannot agree more. Brad has been the perfect opponent, in every possible meaning!


However as soon as Brad will be in B29 range of Japan, he will be able to night bomb. So we'll see the same outcomes we're seeing in Joc-Obvert's game


It is just to overpowered. I think even allowing B29s to night bomb Japanese targets in Japan is a mistake. It is just too easy. Ark and I have limited it very much and although bombing Japan is tougher, it makes for a better game as I have had to approach a lot closer to the home islands in order to have bases in secure fighter range. This in itself promised a tighter longer lasting game which is not a bad thing. We are in mid 45 and I have just seized Korea and am building large air bases there. But if I had the ability to bomb Japan at night, the game would have ended six months ago when I seized Formosa.


_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to GreyJoy)
Post #: 3267
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/18/2013 3:08:59 PM   
JocMeister

 

Posts: 8261
Joined: 7/29/2009
From: Sweden
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton
It is just to overpowered. I think even allowing B29s to night bomb Japanese targets in Japan is a mistake. It is just too easy. Ark and I have limited it very much and although bombing Japan is tougher, it makes for a better game as I have had to approach a lot closer to the home islands in order to have bases in secure fighter range. This in itself promised a tighter longer lasting game which is not a bad thing. We are in mid 45 and I have just seized Korea and am building large air bases there. But if I had the ability to bomb Japan at night, the game would have ended six months ago when I seized Formosa.


Uhm, losing 0,5 B29s for each airborne NF is overpowered? Losing 20-30 days of replacement per strike is overpowered? Per strike!.

I don´t want to hijack GJs AAR but I disagree with precisely everything you just said. Look in my AAR for losses and results doing this "overpowered" night bombing campaign. The numbers are there in detail.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3268
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/18/2013 3:19:21 PM   
paullus99


Posts: 1966
Joined: 1/23/2002
Status: offline
Joc - I would agree. Looking at your losses so far, a sustained bombing campaign would fizzle out in about two weeks (tops) & left the USAAF without a single operable bomber on the map.....

_____________________________

Never Underestimate the Power of a Small Tactical Nuclear Weapon...

(in reply to JocMeister)
Post #: 3269
RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon - 11/18/2013 8:46:26 PM   
obvert


Posts: 12118
Joined: 1/17/2011
From: PDX (and now) London, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: crsutton

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreyJoy

However as soon as Brad will be in B29 range of Japan, he will be able to night bomb. So we'll see the same outcomes we're seeing in Joc-Obvert's game


It is just to overpowered. I think even allowing B29s to night bomb Japanese targets in Japan is a mistake. It is just too easy. Ark and I have limited it very much and although bombing Japan is tougher, it makes for a better game as I have had to approach a lot closer to the home islands in order to have bases in secure fighter range. This in itself promised a tighter longer lasting game which is not a bad thing. We are in mid 45 and I have just seized Korea and am building large air bases there. But if I had the ability to bomb Japan at night, the game would have ended six months ago when I seized Formosa.



quote:

ORIGINAL: JocMeister

Uhm, losing 0,5 B29s for each airborne NF is overpowered? Losing 20-30 days of replacement per strike is overpowered? Per strike!.

I don´t want to hijack GJs AAR but I disagree with precisely everything you just said. Look in my AAR for losses and results doing this "overpowered" night bombing campaign. The numbers are there in detail.



quote:

ORIGINAL: paullus99

Joc - I would agree. Looking at your losses so far, a sustained bombing campaign would fizzle out in about two weeks (tops) & left the USAAF without a single operable bomber on the map.....


Thought I should chime in just for the other view.

Shouldn't we look at what has been accomplished in about two months of bombing vs what has been lost while doing it?

The US night bombing of Tokyo was by all accounts immensely devastating, and yet at the end of the war it was estimated that only about 50% of Tokyo's industrial capacity was destroyed by that campaign.

The bombing in our game has been happening for what, two months? Maybe 10 weeks? Since it began the Allies have knocked out just about half of the industrial capacity of Tokyo. The B-29s have also managed during this time to knock out nearly half of the industry in Osaka as well, and there is virtually no industry still producing outside the Home Islands due to night bombing B-29s. So, as with everything in the stock game, the extremes are there on both sides of the equation.

As to the losses, they are more than even I could have hoped for with the crappy continent of NF Japan can field, but for every B-29 lost they shoot down about 2 NF down as well. Pretty good shootin on both sides.

Only Jocke could answer this, but it's also possible that bombing twice a week is too much for the service 5 airframe, and a lot are being lost due to flying with some fatigue and damage. It would help explain why all of the planes that look to only be damaged in the replay are then lost as A to A, although I'm sure the distance is a problem too. It's interesting as a side note that my pilots are not getting the kills for these planes though they are listed as A to A.

Ours is a scenario 1 game, unlike GJ-Q here playing Babes. The decline caused by strategic bombing will be much quicker without refineries producing supply, and I'm sure Brad is aware of this and wants to continue the game with the challenge of a capable defense to bang against.

_____________________________


"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another with no loss of enthusiasm." - Winston Churchill

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 3270
Page:   <<   < prev  107 108 [109] 110 111   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> After Action Reports >> RE: DEFEAT: The battle of Ambon Page: <<   < prev  107 108 [109] 110 111   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.211